Filthy, stinking, brazen liars:

The economic report released last week by Health and Human Services, which indicated that President Barack Obama’s health care “reform” law would actually increase the cost of health care and impose higher costs on consumers, had been submitted to the office of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius more than a week before the Congressional votes on the bill, according to career HHS sources, who added that Sebelius’s staff refused to review the document before the vote was taken.

dirty, dirty liars

“The reason we were given was that they did not want to influence the vote,” says an HHS source. “Which is actually the point of having a review like this, you would think.”

The analysis, performed by Medicare’s Office of the Actuary, which in the past has been identified as a “nonpolitical” office, set off alarm bells when submitted. “We know a copy was sent to the White House via their legislative affairs staff,” says the HHS staffer, “and there were a number of meetings here almost right after the analysis was submitted to the secretary’s office. Everyone went into lockdown, and people here were too scared to go public with the report.”

Gabriel Malor:

So in addition to midnight votes and bribes to reluctant Congressmen, the Obama folks sat on government reports, reports that the taxpayers paid for, which would have shined a light on the President’s healthcare reform lies. And that’s what they were. He can’t plead ignorance. His own actuaries were telling him it would raise premiums while he was going on TV and saying the opposite.

Jim Hoft:

When Nancy Pelosi told America, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,” she forgot to mention that democrats already knew what was in it. They just didn’t want the rest of the country to find out.

If we had a responsible media this would make headlines for about the next year and a half.

November cannot come soon enough.  I am salivating over the opportunity to vote this year.  I want these people to hurt at the polls.  I want them shamed. Of course, that assumes that they have the capacity to feel shame any more.

The Interstate Commerce Clause And You

Considering that under Obamacare, Congress has asserted that the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution should be interpreted so broadly as to allow Congress the power to require you to engage in commerce, the question arises:  What isn’t “interstate commerce”?  Is there any area of your life that Congress can’t regulate?

So under present Court precedent and legal doctrine, the Constitution consists of five words: Congress shall have the power. That’s it. That’s all there is. It is difficult to imagine anything further from the intent of the Framers.

It amazes me that we have reached such a low point in American history.  How could we have ceded so much of our liberty to our supposedly “limited” government?  Never before have I been so anxious about the state of the nation and the future of liberty.  I hope and pray that the people still have it within them to rise up and rekindle the spirit of the founding of this country.

This Might Be Worth Considering

Timothy P. Cahill
Timothy P. Cahill

Timothy P. Cahill, Treasurer of the State of Massachusetts (and now Independent Gubernatorial Candidate) has some not-so-swell things to say about Romneycare and some even not-so-sweller things to say about the potential of Obamacare:

The Massachusetts treasurer said Tuesday that Congress will “threaten to wipe out the American economy within four years” if it adopts a health-care overhaul modeled after the Bay State’s.

Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill – a former Democrat running as an independent for governor – said the local plan enacted in 2006 has succeeded only because of huge subsidies and favorable regulatory changes from the federal government.

“Who, exactly, is going to bail out the federal government if this plan goes national?” he asked…

…He also gave reporters a copy of a recent state ledger sheet, showing the state’s Medicaid program ballooning from $7.5 billion to a projected $9.2 billion since the plan was adopted. Meanwhile, of the 407,000 newly insured, only 32 percent paid for private insurance wholly by themselves.

The remainder have received partial or total taxpayer subsidies to buy the insurance coverage required by the plan.

Wow – this thing just keeps sounding better and better! I sure hope that our mini-tyrants in Congress keep trying to force it down our throats by any means necessary in order to honor FDR or whatever.  Because after all, who needs doctors anyway when you can pass LANDMARK, HISTORIC LEGISLATION?

Via PowerLine

It’s The Ideology

Paul Ryan, once again, just saying what needs to be said:

And, I really think it comes down to a political philosophy. And they believe in a political philosophy that is more like a cradle to grave, more of a social welfare state, kind of like you see in Europe versus the American ideal that we’ve known and loved and grown up with. And, so really what this is more about is ideology than health care policy. Because if this was about health care policy we could get a bi-partisan agreement tomorrow. It’s not about health care policy. They are trying to ram it through as fast as they can before their power slips away from them and that’s why they’re trying to create this brand new entitlement which really does have the government takeover 17% of our economy.

Does Michael Gerson Actually Believe This?

Obamacare is Obama’s idea of “the Middle Path“?

Whatever the legislative fate of health reform — now in the hands of a few besieged House Democrats — the health reformers have failed in their argument. Their proposal has divided Democrats while uniting Republicans, returned American politics to well-worn ideological ruts, employed legislative tactics that smack of corruption, squandered the president’s public standing, lowered public regard for Congress to French revolutionary levels, sucked the oxygen from other agenda items, re-engaged the abortion battle, produced freaks and prodigies of nature such as a Republican senator from Massachusetts, raised questions about the continued governability of America and caused the White House chief of staff to distance himself from the president’s ambitions.It is quite an accomplishment.

For the president, it must also be quite a shock, because he thought he was taking a reasonable, middle path on health reform.

Not a moderate.
Not a moderate.

Look, I know Obama poses as a moderate; that was part of the reason that he was electable in 2008, and even though at this point it’s ludicrous for him to pretend to be concerned about the deficit, the debt, and out of control spending, he still goes out and talks the talk.  Heck, he’s still claiming that Obamacare is going to help bring the deficit down over time even though that claim has been so thoroughly debunked that to do so should make him look like an utter fool every time he opens his mouth on the subject.

No, I don’t think that Obama looks at this and sees a “reasonable, middle path” approach.  I think he looks at this as an acceptable first step on the road to single payer health care.  He would never level with the taxpayers on that, to be sure, because that would be the death of the enterprise.  But the fact remains that Obama is no moderate.  He is not reasonable.  He most certainly is, despite his claims to the contrary, an ideologue.  That is the only reason for him to continue to double- and even triple-down on this nasty health care plan that has been overwhelmingly rejected by the voters.  That’s the reason that he says he wouldn’t mind being a one-term president as long as he gets health care reform.  That’s why the polls showing a growing Republican wave election coming straight at him don’t seem to bother him.  He’s an ideologue.  He’s a true believer. This is exactly the reason why Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn really did matter in the 2008 election.  Obama was never looking for a “middle way,” because Obama is a creature of the left.  Those of us on the right that pointed this out during the election were derided, mocked, and laughed at.  Now?  Not so much.